Institute For Policy Studies v. Central Intelligence Agency

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Royce C. Lamberth, Chief Judge

ORDER

This Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.C. §§ 552 et seq., case comes before the court on defendant's Motion [23] for Summary Judgment, plaintiff's Motion [32] for Summary Judgment, defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Strike Declaration and Defendant's Supplement to Motion for Summary Judgment [41], plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Supplement to Motion for Summary Judgment and Reply to Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [70], Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [83], and plaintiff's Surreply to Defendant's Final Summary Judgment Brief and Supplemental Memorandum [92]. Upon consideration of these filings, the applicable law, and the entire record in this case, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion; it is hereby

ORDERED that on the issue of plaintiff's motion to strike portions of the Dorn, Culver, DiMaio, and Little Declarations on the basis of lacking personal knowledge, IPS's Motions to Strike are DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of the CIA conducting a search based on the date of the request, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of CIA providing IPS with a Vaughn Index with an incorrect FOIA reference number, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of CIA searching only two of the five directorates, IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and CIA's Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of CIA not searching for records pertaining to 'Pablo Escobar,' IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and CIA's Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of applicability of FOIA Exemption 1 to the withheld documents, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' cross motion for summary judgment is DENIED as to the following documents: 1333991, 1333992, 1340582, 1340583, 1340584, 1340585, 1340586, 1391030, 1397243, 1368251, and 1385928; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of applicability of FOIA Exemption 2 to the withheld documents, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' cross-Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of applicability of FOIA Exemption 3 to the withheld documents, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of applicability of FOIA Exemption 6 to the withheld documents, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that FOIA Exemption 7(C), 7(D), 7(E), and 7(F) to the withheld documents, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of declaratory relief with respect to a fee waiver, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of declaratory relief with respect to the CIA's delay in their response to IPS' appeal, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that on the issue of relief under the Administrative Procedure Act, CIA's Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and IPS' Cross-Motion for summary judgment is DENIED.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that CIA is to perform searches in the remaining three directorates not previously searched; and it is further

ORDERED that CIA is to perform IPS' requested search for documents pertaining to 'Pablo Escobar;' and it is further

ORDERED that the counsel for the parties shall meet and confer regarding a schedule for further proceedings herein, and submit within twenty (20) days of this date a proposed order for the Court's approval, jointly if possible; separately, if necessary, keeping in mind this request was made in 2004 and this case has been pending in this Court since 2006.

Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.